Delhi High Court
The Orienal Insurance Co Ltd vs Shakuntla And Ors on 15 April, 2019
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision : 15.04.2019
+ MAC.APP. 1078/2016
THE ORIENAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant
Through Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv.
versus
SHAKUNTLA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA
JUDGMENT
A.K.CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
1. By the instant appeal, the appellant-the insurer assails the judgment-
award dated 15.10.2016 passed by MACT, Shahdara, to the limited extent of
quantum of compensation, and, the rate of interest applied, thereon. In view
of the restricted challenge to the impugned judgment-award, the advertence
to the factual aspects, on which the claim petition was maintained before the
Tribunal, is not called for.
After the issuance of the notice of the instant appeal, the claimants-
respondent Nos. 1 to 5 have filed the cross-objections under Order 41 R. 22
accompanied with an application being CM No. 17647/2018 seeking
condonation of delay in filing such cross-objections. By the cross-
objections, the claimants-respondent Nos. 1 to 5 seek enhacement of the
compensation awarded. For the reasons given in the application seeking
condonation of delay (CM No. 17648/2018), which is supported by an
affidavit and to which, no reply has come to be filed, the delay in filing the
cross-objections is condoned. Cross-objections be registered separately as
MAC APP.
2. The compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act in
short, 'the MV Act', has come to be awarded to the claimants on account of
death of Sonu @ Bablu, who died in the motor accident involving bus No.
UP 16 BT 9556 in short, the offending vehicle, which was insured with the
appellant-the insurer (MAC APPL. 1078/52016). The claimants are the
widow, children, widow mother, and, the unmarried sister, of the deceased.
The Tribunal has awarded the compensation under the following heads :
S. No. Name of heads Amount
1. Loss of dependency/ contribution Rs.13,20,696/-
to the family
2. Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
3. Loss of love and affection Rs.1,00,000/-
4. Loss of estate Rs.25,000/-
5. Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/-
TOTAL Rs.15,70,696/-
3. In assessing the compensation under the head of loss of
dependency/contribution to the family, the Tribunal has applied the
minimum wages for unskilled worker in NCT of Delhi at Rs.8,632/- and the
annual income has thus been assessed at Rs.1,03,584/-. As regards this head,
the compensation awarded is in the sum of Rs.13,20,696/-. While, the
appellant-the insurer, has no grievance, to even compensation, the claimants,
by way of cross-objections, seek enhancement thereof, on the premise that
the compensation so awarded does not take into account the future prospects
in consonance with the ratio of the judgment in 'National Insurance
Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Ors.' 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1270.
Undisputedly, the deceased was a painter, aged about 27 years, and, Pranay
Sethi's case (supra), recognises the grant of future income/prospects and
prescribes addition of 40% of the actual income, to assess the loss of
income/dependency. During the course of hearing, both the ld. Counsel for
the parties concede that no such addition has come to be made by the
Tribunal in awarding compensation under the subject head, and, on an
addition made to such an effect, the compensation awarded under the head
of loss of income/dependency, would stand enhanced from Rs.13,20,696/- to
Rs.18,48,975/-. When the ratio of Pranay Sethi's case (supra) comes to be
so applied, the compensation under the heads of loss of consortium, loss of
estate and funeral expenses also require to be modified, in consonance
therewith. Though, the ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation of
Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of consortium towards spousal only, in
Pranay Sethi's case, the Supreme Court, has prescribed compensation under
this head to be Rs.40,000/-. In Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs.
Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Ors., 2018 SCC Online SC 1546, the
Supreme Court taking note of Pranay Sethi's case (supra) has noted that
consortium is a compendious term which encompasses spousal consortium,
parental consortium and filial consortium. In view of the ratio of the
judgment in Magma's case (supra), the claimants, other than the widow,
who are the children, widow mother and the unmarried sister require to be
compensated under the said head, as well. Calculated thus, the compensation
under the head of loss of consortium would stand enhanced from
Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 5). Pranay Sethi's case does
not provide for any compensation under the head of loss of love and
affection. Thus, following the judgments of Pranay Sethi and Magma
(supra), the compensation under the different heads would be, as under:
S. Heads of Compensation As per the As per the
No. Impugned Modified
Award Award
1. Loss of dependency/ Rs.13,20,696/- Rs.18,48,975/-
contribution to the family
2. Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rs.40,000 x 5)
3. Loss of love and affection Rs.1,00,000/- -
4. Loss of estate Rs.25,000/- Rs.15,000/-
5. Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/- Rs.15,000/-
TOTAL Rs.15,70,696/- Rs.20,78,975
Total revised compensation, thus, comes to Rs.20,78,975/-. Enhanced
compensation shall be deposited by the appellant with the Tribunal within
six weeks from today, failing which, enhanced compensation shall attract
interest @ 12% p.a. from today. Enhanced compensation so deposited shall
be apportioned and disbursed by the Tribunal in consonance with the terms
and conditions of the award.
4. As regards the interest on the award amount, the Tribunal has
awarded interest @ 12% from the date of filing the petition till realisation.
In Pranay Sethi's case (supra), the Supreme Court has awarded interest @
9% p.a. and it is desirable that same parameters are applied to avoid any
disparity in the award of compensation. The interest awarded @ 12% is
therefore, reduced and modified to 9% p.a.
5. Statutory deposited with interest, if any, in MAC 1078/2016 shall be
released back to the appellant insurance company.
6. Both the appeal and the cross-objections stand disposed off
accordingly. Interim orders passed on 21.12.2016 stand vacated.
A. K. CHAWLA, J
APRIL 15, 2019
rc
